From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 12:10:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 12:10:43 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:54032 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 12:10:42 -0500 To: "John W. M. Stevens" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@projects.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: Horrible L2 cache effects from kernel compile References: <3E5ABBC1.8050203@us.ibm.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <20030225170546.GA23772@morningstar.nowhere.lie.suse.lists.linux.kernel> From: Andi Kleen Date: 25 Feb 2003 18:20:57 +0100 In-Reply-To: "John W. M. Stevens"'s message of "25 Feb 2003 18:11:19 +0100" Message-ID: X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "John W. M. Stevens" writes: > http://www.sourcejudy.com/downloads/10minutes.htm Feel free to code it up. If you did I'm sure someone would be willing to test it on large boxes too. However with RCU in the equation looking may get very interesting... Hash tables have the advantage that they're simply enough for lockless tricks; balanced trees are likely not so lucky. -Andi (who took a look at judy some time ago but it looked horribly complicated, even worse so than skiplists)